State v. Martin

“[T]he doctrine of the law of the case is inapplicable in light of new facts or evidence bearing on the legal issue in question.” State ex rel. Orbanco Real Estate Serv. v. Allen, 720 P.2d 365 (1986).

The State appealed the trial court’s decision on remand that the “law of the case” doctrine precluded the State from introducing evidence to establish chain of custody for Defendant’s blood alcohol content (BAC). The State assigned error to the trial court granting Defendant’s motion in limine which barred the State from “[its] opportunity to prove chain of custody.” Defendant argued that giving the State a second chance to establish custody of Defendant’s BAC would impermissibly violate the “law of the case” doctrine.  “[T]he doctrine of the law of the case is inapplicable in light of new facts or evidence bearing on the legal issue in question.” State ex rel. Orbanco Real Estate Serv. v. Allen, 720 P.2d 365 (1986). The Court reasoned that nothing in its first order of remand in this case barred the State from introducing evidence to show chain of custody for the BAC results. The Court concluded that the trial court’s determination preventing the State from introducing evidence to establish chain of custody was in error. Pretrial order reversed and remanded.